4 ms·
Thought this was an interesting comment: > Lord Ridley told MPs: “I also think it’s more likely than not because we have to face the fact after two months we k
by ericmay 5y ago
Thought this was an interesting comment:
> Lord Ridley told MPs: “I also think it’s more likely than not because we have to face the fact after two months we knew the origins of Sars, and after a couple of months we knew Mers was though through camels, but after two years we still haven't found a single infected animal that could be the progenitor, and that’s incredibly surprising.
There have been tons of threads about this so we are just rehashing the same info mostly but this was an interesting point I hadn’t heard of on previously considered.
- nradov 5y agoThe closest viral relative found so far was in Laotian bats. But it's not an exact match and doesn't settle the issue one way or another. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02596-2 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02596-2
- yucky 5y agoWell, we know the virus existed in the lab in Wuhan. If we don't have any evidence of it existing elsewhere, maybe the simplest explanation is the correct one. The bigger issue people have is that discussion has been so heavily censored in areas like the US where censorship is not the norm, or at least not desired. This throws fuel on the fire of censorship debate.